Julf wrote:
> As it should be in any decently designed DAC - if your DAC is sensitive
> to source, there is something wrong.
My point exactly. Bits is bits, so if it isn't awesome, something is
wrong.
drmatt's Profile:
drmatt wrote:
> the sound quality is just incredible - even from a lowly SBT playing
> flacs over WiFi from a home built server, and running off its bog
> standard wall wart PSU. :)
As it should be in any decently designed DAC - if your DAC is sensitive
to source, there is something wrong.
Mnyb wrote:
> That's weird ? Assuming you have a normally very quit DAC ? Much gain in
> the system ?
It's not particularly quiet no, and the gain on the DAC through the
pre-amp is very high which makes this worse. Result is noise level is
relatively obvious if it steps up a few dB (such as
if you think it's the SBT, i personally would have no qualms about a
factory reset on the spot. i have done that with several devices over
the years. i also like to go for a clean reinstall of LMS (it's why i
keep a virginal copy of the original virtual machine) whenever some
weird issue appears.
drmatt wrote:
> Fwiw (warning: not measured, for those that care) I have the impression
> that the background noise level is noticeably higher when the issue is
> happening...
>
> Gonna swap the SBT..
That's weird ? Assuming you have a normally very quit DAC ? Much gain in
the system ?
Fwiw (warning: not measured, for those that care) I have the impression
that the background noise level is noticeably higher when the issue is
happening...
Gonna swap the SBT..
drmatt's Profile:
Julf wrote:
> So worth trying to isolate the issue. Next time your system goes into
> the weird mode, try turning the DAC on and off to see if it fixes the
> problem.
Pretty sure I have power cycled the amp during this phase before and it
didn't snap out of it but yes this is obviously one to
Mnyb wrote:
> But the point is when there is no difference a human could hear ? then
> taste does not come into to it at all . We are there with most digital
> sources of reasonable quality .
>
> Most "issues" these days are of such smal influence that human bias are
> magnitudes bigger .
>
>
drmatt wrote:
> How do you suggest I go about measuring my perception that the sound
> wasn't as good?
I suggest you check out the two ITU recommendations I mentioned.
> Hope the OP appreciates your efforts to prevent opinions getting in the
> way of his pursuit of the truth.
Nothing wrong
drmatt wrote:
> Also possible. Annoying if so cos trust me I do not have a spare..
So worth trying to isolate the issue. Next time your system goes into
the weird mode, try turning the DAC on and off to see if it fixes the
problem.
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be
Julf wrote:
> You keep making claims without any factual support. We don't know that
> we can't measure to tell the difference between the type of sound you
> prefer and the type I prefer until we try. It might be possible that our
> preferences differ based on easily measurable parameters.
How
Julf wrote:
> Rather unlikely. I would suspect your DAC getting into some funky mode,
> and resynchronizing when you unplug and replug the cable.
Also possible. Annoying if so cos trust me I do not have a spare..
drmatt wrote:
> You still can't measure to tell the difference between the type of sound
> I prefer and the type you prefer.
You keep making claims without any factual support. We don't know that
we can't measure to tell the difference between the type of sound you
prefer and the type I prefer
drmatt wrote:
> My suspicion is I have a dodgy spdif output chip that is dropping output
> stream resolution at times, but on a warm relink to the DAC goes back to
> full res.
Rather unlikely. I would suspect your DAC getting into some funky mode,
and resynchronizing when you unplug and replug
drmatt wrote:
> Everything you said was obvious and not "news" to anyone. You still
> can't measure to tell the difference between the type of sound I prefer
> and the type you prefer.
But the point is when there is no difference a human could hear ? then
taste does not come into to it at all .
Julf wrote:
> Indeed. Factual accuracy is a true sign of pedantry.
Everything you said was obvious and not "news" to anyone. You still
can't measure to tell the difference between the type of sound I prefer
and the type you prefer.
due to sheer convenience i dial my Dac+preamp at a medium-high listening
level, and fine-tune the volume with the LMS remote on my iPad. i can
not ever hear a difference in sound quality, even with 192/24 recordings
(not that i can tell or care to tell a difference between 24/192 and
16/44.1 of
drmatt wrote:
> Probably best to just move it to the pedantry section.
Indeed. Factual accuracy is a true sign of pedantry.
Sent from my ZQ864e36 using Firefox.
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear
drmatt wrote:
> Meanwhile, still would like to find out how to find a live value of the
> in-use bitrate on the spdif outputs..
>
> Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk
If it does not transcode it is what the file is + 8 zeroes on the spdiff
out if it's 16 bit material or something else if you
Meanwhile, still would like to find out how to find a live value of the
in-use bitrate on the spdif outputs..
Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
Mnyb wrote:
> It should be noted that there are no real 24 bit audio anywhere ( except
> some electronica ) both ADC and DAC is practically limited to about 21
> bit in practice a squeezebox touch analog out would be aproxmately 17
> bits .
Indeed, I'm told my DAC manages about 18 bit of clear
Julf wrote:
> Obviously I can. A lot of what makes up good sound quality as an
> objective criteria can be quantified and measured, and subjective
> preferences can also be measured (in the meaning of "assignment of a
> number to a characteristic of an object or event, which can be compared
>
I'm even trying to use small amounts of digital attenuatiin to my
beneffit ? Result inconclusive , but one noted side effect is that in
practice you dont hear the squeezebox volume control imo at least not
small amounts of it .
We had discussion about intersample overshots some over sampling
drmatt wrote:
> My ears. Haha. YMMV.
Yes - the key part of that is "YMMV". And "haha". :)
> Obviously you can't measure sound quality can you??
Obviously I can. A lot of what makes up good sound quality as an
objective criteria can be quantified and measured, and subjective
preferences can
My ears. Haha. YMMV.
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105484
___
drmatt wrote:
> I am however certain that using the digital volume or replaygain on the
> SB results in poorer, not just quieter, sound...
What's your certainty based on?
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery
Julf wrote:
> Disabling RG will not hurt quality, but you lose the RG functionality,
> so there should be a somewhat better reason that "it won't hurt". As to
> volume control, digital volume control can often be much better than
> analog, so setting fixed 100% vol is actually harmful to sound
It's a 24b/96k DAC. Have to admit I assumed the SB was sending 16 bits
because the source is a 16 bit flac.. Maybe that's not true.
I am however certain that using the digital volume or replaygain on the
SB results in poorer, not just quieter, sound...
Well if the dac is a true 16bit design i would not use digital volume,
the spdiff standard is a bit weird it is basically 16 bit + 8 extra bits
legacy design just discards the extra bits ( backwars compatible ) so
you would runcate at the dac interface if using digital
Volume you would never get
drmatt wrote:
> My view was that disabling RG and setting fixed 100% vol will never hurt
> the quality and it /can/ degrade it. So I figured it was a fair punt!
Disabling RG will not hurt quality, but you lose the RG functionality,
so there should be a somewhat better reason that "it won't
Julf wrote:
> Fair enough, but not something I would advice other people to -always-
> do.
My view really is that disabling RG and setting fixed 100% vol will
never hurt the quality and it /can/ degrade it. So I figured it was a
fair punt!
drmatt wrote:
> Well I have a 16 bit DAC with an analogue pre-amp and volume control
> after it. The DAC is 24 bit capable to be fair, but I choose to use the
> pre amp section for volume control instead of the SB output level as I
> find it better...
Fair enough, but not something I would
Mnyb wrote:
> Squeezeboxes always put out 24bit data 16 bit material is paddel with
> 8bits and then the volume control is made in 24bit it's not dithered but
> the steps are cleverly chosen so and truncation happens at rely low
> volumes where the volume is low :) so you practically don't hear
Well I have a 16 bit DAC with an analogue pre-amp and volume control
after it. The DAC is 24 bit capable though.
Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk
drmatt's Profile:
drmatt wrote:
> Well, in my case I have an external DAC so I want the original bits off
> the CD sent to it at 44k/16b. The volume and replaygain are applied
> within this precision and are audible.
So you have a 16-bit DAC that does the volume processing at 16 bits?
Must be a really old one.
Squeezeboxes always put out 24bit data 16 bit material is paddel with
8bits and then the volume control is made in 24bit it's not dithered but
the steps are cleverly chosen so and truncation happens at rely low
volumes where the volume is low :) so you practically don't hear that .
So both
Well, in my case I have an external DAC so I want the original bits off
the CD sent to it at 44k/16b. The volume and replaygain are applied
within this precision and are audible.
drmatt's Profile:
drmatt wrote:
> Always disable replaygain when doing critical listening as it's done in
> the digital domain and adds aliasing at the LSB. And have the output
> volume at 100% too and use an external pre amp.
I am always careful of any advice that includes the word "always". :)
I guess this
Always disable replaygain when doing critical listening as it's done in
the digital domain and adds aliasing at the LSB.
Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk
drmatt's Profile:
dhallag wrote:
> and I haven't changed anything under file types. yes I do get sound and
> yes it sounds good... so to answer the relevant question of trusting my
> ears, part of this is my personal experiment to see how different file
> types sound -- I have the album thriller in 192/24,
and I haven't changed anything under file types. yes I do get sound and
yes it sounds good... so to answer the relevant question of trusting my
ears, part of this is my personal experiment to see how different file
types sound -- I have the album thriller in 192/24, 96/24, 44.1/16 and
320
Mnyb wrote:
> The 705kBps is bogus , its a bug LMS just presents a placeholder value ,
> so you can discard that .
>
> Does the conversion actually work ? do you get sound ?
>
> Do you have a complete log for the conversion process , somewhere in
> there you see the SoX parameters used . But
pablolie wrote:
> it's best to stay true to the original, which is 192-24 with the Touch,
> and I think it's 96-24 with classic versions. From that point on it's
> your DAC's capabilities that kick in, LMS and the SB provided an error
> free digital path. :-)
Agree with your point, but as an
Mnyb wrote:
> there are some in whos believe system you should send pcm/wav to the
> player , which is nonsense.
"but it is more bits, so has to be better!" :)
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a
pablolie wrote:
> Like Mnyb stated - there's a bug in the way LMS reports higher bitrates.
> Ignore it. Just make sure that under Settings>Advanced>File Types you
> have your relevant stuff set up to "Native". Then you can be sure your
> SB is doing it's best to stay true to the original, which
Like Mnyb stated - there's a bug in the way LMS reports higher bitrates.
Ignore it. Just make sure that under Settings>Advanced>File Types you
have your relevant stuff set up to "Native". Then you can be sure your
SB is doing it's best to stay true to the original, which is 192-24 with
the Touch,
The 705kBps is bogus , its a bug LMS just presents a placeholder value ,
so you can discard that .
Does the conversion actually work ? do you get sound ?
Do you have a complete log for the conversion process , somewhere in
there you see the SoX parameters used . But the squeezebox environment
dhallag wrote:
> Is there an easy way to verify the bitrate my music is playing at?
What happened to good old "trust your ears"? :)
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will
Hi Everyone. As a reminder, I have a squeezebox touch running the
enhanced digital out via USB to a Jolida Tube DAC III that process
192/24. Is there an easy way to verify the bitrate my music is playing
at? I have plenty of 192/24 96/24 files but I always get thrown by the
"Converted to
49 matches
Mail list logo
